The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:33, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Suvigya Sharma[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable artist. No works in major museum collections (or, for that matter, any museum collections) . The refs are the usual sort of barely described PR, or are mere notices,or both together. Promotional wording throughout, as well. DGG ( talk ) 02:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still questionable overall and this is the expected overall appearance of such articles which have more than meets eye. SwisterTwister talk 04:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: First of all, Artist Suvigya Sharma has received media coverage of DNA India, Times of India, Daily Bhaskar, Mid Day, Yahoo News, Indian Express, Outlook, Deccan Herald, Navbharat Times, Mumbai Mirror, Daily Mail etc, are significant and reliable news sources, not a barely PR stuff. Mr DGG.

The media overages he received fulfills Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines and Wikipedia:Notability (people). The media coverage clearly suggest that he meets the Wikipedia's Notability guidelines. If you think there is praising words in article, then it should be removed, the article should not to be deleted.--150.129.29.104 (talk) 05:04, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now article has been improved by me by removing praising words, adding more information and citations. --150.129.29.104 (talk) 13:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Nomination without merit. As per norms, passes WP:NG and sources found on HighBeam. Caroline A. Murphy (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I am astonished by this nomination. Coverage of Sharma has been very significant in the quality and popular press in India and elsewhere. Evidence of meeting WP:GNG is abundantly clear. Was WP:BEFORE performed here? If a cleanup is required do it or tag the article. Don't nominate a worthwhile, well-sourced article for deletion, especially when it raises questions of WP:GEOBIAS AusLondonder (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
keep Reliable, independent sources. ShelbyMarion (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read the references. She may meet the GNG but there is an additional requirement: WP:CREATIVE. That guideline exists precisely because artists and related professions tend to get PR-based articles for individual exhibitions or works--in every country, India not excluded--, and it is necessary to have a more objective criterion also. There is no evidence his work is regarded as important by his peers; he originated no important to concept or technique;he has not produced a major body of work that has attracted significant critical notice; nor is it part of a a major museum's collection. DGG ( talk ) 00:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem from my point of view is not being part of major museum collection, but the lack of any exhibition, that is not part of commercial galleries. Nowadays the museums tend not to extend their collections, but to held temporary exhibitions. Especially in photography world, you almost can't find any major museum with significant collection. But a notable artist should at least have an exhibition in any public space, either gallery or museum, which I can't find in this case. Also, agree that at least one professional review of portfolio would support the claim of notability. Hence, I tend to Delete. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Huh, This is heck, DGG. Maybe, You may be right, but it can be easily understood by anyone that all these citations cannot be just PR as you are describing it. Despite of several significant coverage from Indian Media, There are Indian Government sources, which can be considered highly reliable and authentic. And nobody bothered to read non-English coverage

Coverage received to the subject, clearly meets Basic criteria of notability WP:GNG, WP:Creative

- Apart from works for Bollywood celebrities and business tycoon, Artist has done restoration for Singapore Art Museum (SAM), a national museum and one of the major tourist attractions in Singapore.

- Restoration and fresco painting projects to his credit including famous architectural heritage sites in India such as the City Palace, Jaipur and Jama Masjid.

Source : Here, Daily Bhaskar, an Indian Hindi-language daily newspaper that is now the largest circulated daily newspaper of India (Audit Bureau of Circulations)

- His collaboration with Make in India, an initiate of Government of India.

Sources : Indian government website, Please find in the article.

As significant coverage from from DNA India, Daily Mail, Times of India, India Today, Yahoo News, Daily Bhaskar, Mid Day, Indian Express, Outlook India, NDTV India, News Nation, Afternoon, Marwar India, Bollywood Hungama, Deccan Herald etc received to Sharma, is enough to prove WP:GNG.So that article can be kept.--103.195.248.92 (talk) 10:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Problem I see that, for example, I didn't find any mention of him in connection with Singapore Art Museum restoration project. Also, I've translated the article you mentioned, and it's the same text, which is copy pasted in other articles over and over again, which makes the claim of it being promotional stronger. Significant coverage per WP:ARTIST has to have multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, which I don't see in all these articles. Working with notable celebrities does not make one a notable. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is clearly mention of him in Daily Bhaskar, That he has done restoration work for Singapore Art Museum. I think, It would be more better if reference checked by the person, who knows Hindi well.

In the same news of Daily Bhaskar, It is also clearly mentioned about his restoration and gold leafing work for City Palace, Jaipur, Havelis of Udaipur and Kishangarh, Jain Temple and Jama Masjid. - He is the only artist who has done 3D Pichwai of Shrinathji, no one has attempted before. As mentioned in DNA India's Interview. - He has introduced new form of Tanjore Painting, That is Refined 24carat Gold Tanjore Painting, in which Tanjore and miniature art has been combined. He embellishes with Real 24 carat Gold in Painting, which was used to do by artist in old days. - He is considered one of the important artist who is known for making traditional Indian Art alive. His work mainly based on Indian Art forms, which is now perishing. Known for his Tanjore works and as the only artist nurturing miniature art in India. Source : Reference can be found in News coverage and even in Indian government websites; Times of India, here, DNA, here.

Here I want to correct you that the subject is not working with notable celebrities but as an artist, He is working and painting for Bollywood celebrities and business tycoons of India. In your point of view, This may not make him notable, but In this case, For Indian society, a painter who is working for big celebrities and illustrious business families of India such as Ambani, Birla, Singhania, Piramal, L.N. Mittal, Burmans, Bajaj etc, became subject of interest and attention for Indian media and its audience, as it is covered in many news reference cited in the article, which must be considered.

I just noted your previous comment, where you mentioned about lack of non commercial or exhibitions in public space, either gallery or museum, which is false. As you agrees that his portfolio supports the claim of notability. Yes it is. Wikipedia works as per norms. We do not need to make our own rules. Significant coverage and portfolio supports his notability.

Here I'm trying to answer of your question;

- Artist has done, exhibition at Academy of Fine Arts, Kolkata in 2005. Source can be fund in the Daily Bhaskar, here.

- He held exhibition in Nehru Centre, London in May 2001 , Terrace Gallery, Sussex, England in 1996. Source : Official website of Suvigya Sharma. (Note: This were quite old exhibitions, maybe this is the reason i could not find any reliable source about this. I was not going to mention about this, but when you question about his gallery, public or non commercial exhibition. I find appropriate to mention about this.)

- Exhibition in Artisans Gallery at Kala Ghoda in 2013. Source : Artisans Gallery, here.

- Recently, after AFD, In February, Government of India celebrated Make In India Week, in Mumbai, which was inaugurated by India's Prime Minister Honorable Narendra Modi. For the event Make In India Week (February 13 to 18), Suvigya Sharma was officially chosen by the Govt and showcased his art work. Sources : Government of India's Websites, here (pdf); Mahaudyog, Government of Maharashtra's website, here; and official website of Make In India, here.--150.129.29.226 (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is no way an American artist would be held to such rigorous standards. Classic case of systemic bias. I urge delete !voters above to perform WP:BEFORE and change their !votes. AusLondonder (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And you should remember to assume good faith. There is no indication of bias or the nominator (or the delete votes) not checking before voting. It's pretty bad faith to assume otherwise. freshacconci talk to me 18:32, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: have trimmed and reworked most of the tone of article, was a complete night mare, the article seemd to be a PR page, have been reverting pov for some time, either needs lot of trimming or delete Shrikanthv (talk) 07:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Arthistorian1977's well-reasoned rationale. In contrast to some of the accusations in this AfD, the subject doesn't satisfy WP:ARTIST nor WP:GNG. The sources given are not substantial and yes these are the standards we apply to all subjects of Wikipedia regardless of nationality. Muddying the waters by crying foul is not productive. freshacconci talk to me 18:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.